Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Central Excise, Pune II Versus Shreem Capacitors P. Ltd.

2016 (10) TMI 298 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Reopening of order passed by Settlement Commission - order of settlement or adjudication order? - whether the order passed by the Settlement commission can be reopened? - Held that: - the order passed by the Settlement Commission is not an adjudication order and as per section 127J of the Customs Act, 1962 is an order of settlement between the department and the assessee and it cannot be reopened. - The decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Indorama Synthetics (India) Ltd. vs. UOI .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

- Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) and Shri C.J. Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri N.N. Prabhudesai, Supdt. (AR) for the appellant Shri D.H. Nadkarni, Advocate for the respondent ORDER This appeal is directed against Order-in- Appeal No. PII/BKS/275/2005 dated 24.06.2005. 2. Heard both sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of the records, we find that the issue involved in this case is regarding the allegation that the respondent are not entitled to the cenvat credit as the same has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ommission and paid the customs duty/CVD and other duties as directed by the Settlement Commission. The respondent availed the cenvat credit of such CVD paid by them in furtherance of the order of the Settlement Commission. It is the case of the revenue that respondent is not eligible for CVD credit as the said CVD was paid after the issuance of show-cause notice which invoked the extended period and alleged suppression and mis-statement of facts. Ld. adjudicating authority confirmed the demands .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

before the Settlement Commission cannot be considered as clean chit given for mis-statement and collusion and has to be considered as an amount have been paid due to mis-statement or suppression of fact and hence credit is deniable. It is his submission that the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of Indorama Synthetics (India) Ltd. vs. UOI 2013 (290) ELT 208 is applicable as in that case the Hon'ble High Court has settled the law as to what is the effect of order of Settlement Co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Forum
what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version